justice4nifong: Official J4N Investigation into Reginald Daye's autopsy report and death

Saturday, June 6, 2015

Official J4N Investigation into Reginald Daye's autopsy report and death

594 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 594 of 594

Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,
you said:
"I won't get Mangum's approval before posting my next sharlog, but I will send her a copy of the transcript (which will accompany my next sharlog) with my next correspondence. I will be visiting her tomorrow and will discuss the contents of the sharlog with her again in great detail. I don't have a problem with keeping her abreast of what I'm doing, but with Ann Petersen representing her, she has very little if any influence with regards of how her appeal is being handled. Therefore, I'm concentrating on doing what I can to get her free instead of trying to rely on her appellate attorney."

Is there a reason why you don't take the transcript to her when you visit with her and have her approve it after looking it over closely? If you are talking extensively to Ms. Mangum about her open case, then posting anything in public about those discussions should be approved explictly by Ms. Mangum before being made public. It seriously does not seem to be the right thing to do in this case and on this blog, especially at this time. So why are you planning on doing it?

One nice thing about the visits at the Women's prison is that they are contact visits... that is we sit in chairs facing one another, as opposed to the Durham Detention Center where the inmates were held behind thick glass partitions that you had to yell across in order to be heard. Upon entering the visitation area, visitors are not allowed to carry in possessions of any sort, so I could not bring papers to show to her, for example. We do discuss strategy, so she knows what's going on. Naturally, I work as fast as possible to attempt to gain her freedom as soon as possible. Having her approval for everything I do would only slow down that process.; June 18, 2015 at 2:08 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
"The wound was not the proximate cause of death, ergo, Mangum is not guilty of murder."

Both the ME and Dr. Roberts say you are wrong.

Please provide the name of 1 physician who agrees with your argument here.

Both the ME and Dr. Roberts have an agenda... to protect Duke University Hospital by concealing its responsibility for Daye's death. They are also highly motivated to have Mangum convicted. Yes, both doctors are wrong, and they know it. Mangum's case is too political to get any other physician involved... politician, or anyone else for that matter.; June 18, 2015 at 2:12 PM
Anonymous said...: proximate cause
n. a happening which results in an event, particularly injury due to negligence or an intentional wrongful act.

It would probably help you, Sid, if you knew the actual definition of "proximate cause".

Now that you know it, you should be able to see why the stabbing (the happening) resulted in the event (Mr. Daye's trip to the hospital and subsequent death) is considered the proximate cause.

You're welcome.; June 18, 2015 at 2:14 PM
Anonymous said...: "Both the ME and Dr. Roberts have an agenda...blah blah blah"

Bunch of crap Sid. I'm betting that you could find a physician who graduated from the University of Kentucky who would look it this...Simply because they hate Duke because of "the shot".

You're just too damn lazy to look because you KNOW you are wrong, and are afraid to have yet another person confirm it.; June 18, 2015 at 2:19 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Of course there is a reason he doesn't get her approval nor ever show us she agrees with what he's doing. Whatbhecis going to do in this Shitlog is say that Kia Haynes is lying about sharing a wall - his evidence will be - a typo (or intentional lie) in the police report vs the oral testimony. Kia and Crystal said she lived next door - Sid will say Kia is lying (perjury), Crystal was confused. The police report will have a different apartment number - which could just be a typo - but will be proof of a conspiracy.

Remember - everyone is infallible and doesn't make mistakes except when Sid needs them to - or its Crystal,

He's not asking Crystal for a diagram of the apartments or if he is right - he is going on assumptions and doesn't want her to tell him he is wrong. So of course he isn't clearing it - and he knows Kenny and Tinfoil will take what he says as true, and it will fuel the conspiracy. The rest of us will not. He will still do nothing through proper channels - so he will again stoke his ego, again show Crystal he is her only true hero, and again accomplish nothing. And still never even attempt to contact those who could (if they would talk but probably not) provide him answers.

Hah! Very good. My sharlog should be hopefully finished by the weekend's end. I have completely finished Part One... it's in the can (Hollywood term?). Stay tuned... smoking gun/crystal clear enlightenment is just days away.; June 18, 2015 at 2:21 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
"Both the ME and Dr. Roberts have an agenda...blah blah blah"

Bunch of crap Sid. I'm betting that you could find a physician who graduated from the University of Kentucky who would look it this...Simply because they hate Duke because of "the shot".

You're just too damn lazy to look because you KNOW you are wrong, and are afraid to have yet another person confirm it.

My precious time is much better spent enlightening the masses by producing my sharlogs rather than trying to find doctors to verify the obvious.; June 18, 2015 at 2:23 PM
Anonymous said...: I mean the lady that was contracted to train police squadrons in California about the issues related to the illnesses inherent in domestic violence or similar. Her testimony was not allowed by the prosecution in the trial because she did not hold a professional degree in that area of expertise. If the expert didn't hold a professional degree even though she had understanding and a professional job training in that of the area of expertise, you can be sure that the jury did not have the professional degrees nor sufficient knowledge or understanding on those issues to judge anyone who appears to be afflicted with similar illnesses. Therefore the jury was not informed (or qualified) enough to make a judgement on the issue of self-defense in this case, since it is an integral part in understanding Ms. Mangum's state of mind at the time of the attack and assault.; June 18, 2015 at 2:24 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: A Lawyer said...
The example I learned in law school (and I can't tell you if this is also the law in North Carolina) was that if a mugger punches you in the jaw to steal your wallet, and you are lightly stunned and fall into the gutter, and a drunken driver comes along a few minutes later and runs you over, the mugger is guilty of murder and the drunk driver is guilty of manslaughter.

Hey, A Lawyer.

Your teachings in law school make things more complicated than they are. My take on the scenario presented is that the mugger is guilty of assault and robbery, and the drunken driver is guilty of manslaughter. Simple as that.; June 18, 2015 at 2:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

If you cause her harm by what you post in your Sharlog's and on this blog that slows down the process of 'winning' her freedom, you are wasting your time and hers and causing her greater harm. You do understand that right?; June 18, 2015 at 2:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Hey, A Lawyer.

Your teachings in law school make things more complicated than they are. My take on the scenario presented is that the mugger is guilty of assault and robbery, and the drunken driver is guilty of manslaughter. Simple as that.

But, that's just it - your take is wrong, and not based on the law - but based on Sid Harr fantasy world.

Sid knows he's hurting Crystal, he doesn't care - this whole Shitlog is one big ego trip for him and Kenny.; June 18, 2015 at 2:42 PM
guiowen said...: Actually, if Crystal's state of mind was such that she felt she had to defend herself -- to the point of stabbing -- someone who had hurt her once, but was now walking away, then she shouldn't be in prison. She should be in a facility for the criminally insane.
The last thing we need is to have some woman walking around who will stab to death anyone who offends her.; June 18, 2015 at 3:00 PM
Anonymous said...: that's funny g... considering duke is one of the most pc knee-jerking environments in this nation.

Anyway, that's not how all the illnesses in that category works obviously if cops self-defend themselves like that to people they have never even met and have never hurt them in the least.; June 18, 2015 at 3:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

In your response to a comment (shown below), you imply you agree with what the poster is saying (all of it). Can you clarify your response. Thank you.

Anonymous said...
Of course there is a reason he doesn't get her approval nor ever show us she agrees with what he's doing. Whatbhecis going to do in this Shitlog is say that Kia Haynes is lying about sharing a wall - his evidence will be - a typo (or intentional lie) in the police report vs the oral testimony. Kia and Crystal said she lived next door - Sid will say Kia is lying (perjury), Crystal was confused. The police report will have a different apartment number - which could just be a typo - but will be proof of a conspiracy.

Remember - everyone is infallible and doesn't make mistakes except when Sid needs them to - or its Crystal,

He's not asking Crystal for a diagram of the apartments or if he is right - he is going on assumptions and doesn't want her to tell him he is wrong. So of course he isn't clearing it - and he knows Kenny and Tinfoil will take what he says as true, and it will fuel the conspiracy. The rest of us will not. He will still do nothing through proper channels - so he will again stoke his ego, again show Crystal he is her only true hero, and again accomplish nothing. And still never even attempt to contact those who could (if they would talk but probably not) provide him answers.

Blogger Nifong Supporter said...

Hah! Very good. My sharlog should be hopefully finished by the weekend's end. I have completely finished Part One... it's in the can (Hollywood term?). Stay tuned... smoking gun/crystal clear enlightenment is just days away.; June 18, 2015 at 3:35 PM
John D. Smith said...: Sidney states: My take on the scenario presented is that the mugger is guilty of assault and robbery, and the drunken driver is guilty of manslaughter.

This example demonstrates why you should never, ever, not in a thousand years, ever act on your legal judgment. You are remarkable in your inability to grasp concepts. This example is simple, straightforward and raises no particularly complicated issues.

The mugger, in addition to assault and robbery, clearly is also guilty of murder. He is responsible for the chain of events that began with his commission of a crime. He committed assault and robbery. You got that right. He knocked the victim down. He is responsible for knocking the victim down into the gutter. Bad things can happen if you knock someone down into a gutter. The drunk driver came by and killed him. The mugger is responsible for the victim's death, even though he may not have intended to kill him, and, in this case, the victim would not have died if he had not been run over by the drunk driver. The mugger set the chain of events in motion and is responsible for all of the events.

Although, as explained above, the mugger is responsible for the victim's death and is guilty of murder, the drunk driver is ALSO responsible for the victim's death. He is guilty of manslaughter (although I believe that in some jurisdictions, he may be subject to more serious murder charges).

This example is interesting because it demonstrates that there can be MORE THAN ONE proximate cause. More than one person, in this case the mugger AND the drunk driver, are responsible for the victim's death. The punch was a proximate cause AND the vehicle running over the victim was a proximate cause.

Your egregiously incorrect answer to this example (as well as your egregiously incorrect answer to almost every legal question you have addressed) demonstrates why you should never act on your legal judgment. You applied the same incorrect thinking to Mangum's case (in all fairness, Mangum's case may be more interesting in some respects, but not in the conclusion) and convinced her that she had nothing to worry about, that the charges had no basis.

You didn't even attempt to research the law and understand it before you started giving her advice. You hadn't even identified the relevant case law. Even when Walt identified the most important cases, you had no interest in reading them, let alone understanding them. By the time we dragged you screaming and kicking into analyzing Welch, you had already acted on an uninformed conclusion. As we have seen many times, once you have reached a conclusion, you never admit a mistake.

Being a lawyer is more than filing motions, sitting in a law library and carrying a big briefcase filled with paper. Motions consist of more than writing a narrative. Being a lawyer is understanding the law, studying cases and making arguments based on law. You treat it like a big game. Mangum took your advice, acted as though she had no legal exposure and is sitting in prison.

At least you tried. Well done!

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 18, 2015 at 4:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said...

"Beyond a Shadow of a Doubt" is not the standard for Reasonable Doubt - and in fact, the Jury Instruction is:

A reasonable doubt is a doubt based on reason and common sense, arising out of some or all of the evidence that has been presented, or lack or insufficiency of the evidence, as the case may be. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that fully satisfies or entirely convinces you of the defendant's guilt.

If you listen to Jury selection, the lawyers all specifically state it is not beyond all doubt, or beyond a shadow of a doubt ... so you keep clinging to some "beyond a shadow of a doubt" which just shows you refuse to listen. You have your version of truth and ignore the law.

June 18, 2015 at 8:48 AM

I don't refuse to listen - but you sure don't hestitate to criticize every little friggin' thing - and falsly accuse in derogatory manners if someone does not know things about the legal system - is this to make yourself seem 'better than' - or what? ??? I am not a lawyer, and I did not know jury selection was on a youtube video that can be watched and listened to. Is that where someone is supposed to listen to jury selection? You seem to have your version of the law and ignore the truth.; June 18, 2015 at 5:29 PM
guiowen said...: Tinfoil,
People try to educate you, but you refuse to be educated. Then you complain when you're told you're wrong. Do you understand why no one takes you seriously?; June 18, 2015 at 8:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Well since that is your evil duke troll it g... tinfoil hat hatemonger blog-monger untrue twisted version of things g..., I understand that you are still trolling and cyber-bullying to try to win your drinking bet about no one taking this blog seriously with that statement. See - I learned that from listening to your bs for the past few years.

blah; June 18, 2015 at 11:25 PM
Anonymous said...: " Nifong Supporter said...

"My precious time is much better spent enlightening the masses by producing my sharlogs rather than trying to find doctors to verify the obvious."

Presuming two facts not in evidence, that sid's time is precious, and that he enlightens people.; June 19, 2015 at 3:57 AM
Anonymous said...: "Nifong Supporter said...

"Both the ME and Dr. Roberts have an agenda... to protect Duke University Hospital by concealing its responsibility for Daye's death. They are also highly motivated to have Mangum convicted. Yes, both doctors are wrong, and they know it. Mangum's case is too political to get any other physician involved... politician, or anyone else for that matter."

sdney the morally deaf dumb and blind man proclaiming, I see and hear everything and speak authority.; June 19, 2015 at 3:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Actually, 3:57 - presumes 3 facts - that the masses see this blog ... I imagine about 6 - 10 people every actually look at this blog ... you can see on the front page that only 13 people are "fans" on FB, and I imagine most of them don't look.

This is Sid's ego trip, and what he uses to try to keep Crystal deluded and into him. It's just another abusive relationship Crystal is finding herself in, sadly - she clings to people who will reinforce her delusions and are faux protectors - you can see it in Kenny and Sid. They don't care about Crystal, they want to control her. They fit the pattern very well. Isolate her, create the us vs. them, attack anyone who she even begins to trust.

It is just sad she is still in an abusive relationship with them. Abuse doesn't have to be physical, but it is certainly harmful.; June 19, 2015 at 4:41 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

If you cause her harm by what you post in your Sharlog's and on this blog that slows down the process of 'winning' her freedom, you are wasting your time and hers and causing her greater harm. You do understand that right?

I do not believe that anything I post can harm Mangum, especially since what I post is the truth... and the truth will set her free. The mainstream media, the state, and others have been trying to suppress the truth... that is why the only place where the truth is readily available about Mangum's case is on this site. Not posting sharlogs would not be beneficial to her. I believe that once you see the next sharlog you will agree that it will go a long way towards helping her to obtain justice long denied.; June 19, 2015 at 7:43 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
Actually, if Crystal's state of mind was such that she felt she had to defend herself -- to the point of stabbing -- someone who had hurt her once, but was now walking away, then she shouldn't be in prison. She should be in a facility for the criminally insane.
The last thing we need is to have some woman walking around who will stab to death anyone who offends her.

gui, mon ami, the only fantasy is the tall tale told by Daye that he was walking away and for no reason at all Mangum went into the kitchen, got a knife, and stabbed him. That never happened. Neither did Mangum take his money!!; June 19, 2015 at 7:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Except it's not he truth.

1. Wrong on felony murder
2. Wrong on prior record
3. Wrong on prior abuse
4. Wrong on expert expenditures
5. Wrong on proximate cause
6. Wrong on Exculpatory Evidence.

You are wrong more than you are right.; June 19, 2015 at 7:49 AM
Anonymous said...: The jury acquitted on the larceny of chose in action - so not sure your point/issue with constantly bringing it up.

And, Mangum went into another room and got a knife and went after Milton Morgan - why wouldn't she do it to Daye?; June 19, 2015 at 7:50 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

In your response to a comment (shown below), you imply you agree with what the poster is saying (all of it). Can you clarify your response. Thank you.

Anonymous said...
Of course there is a reason he doesn't get her approval nor ever show us she agrees with what he's doing. Whatbhecis going to do in this Shitlog is say that Kia Haynes is lying about sharing a wall - his evidence will be - a typo (or intentional lie) in the police report vs the oral testimony. Kia and Crystal said she lived next door - Sid will say Kia is lying (perjury), Crystal was confused. The police report will have a different apartment number - which could just be a typo - but will be proof of a conspiracy.

Remember - everyone is infallible and doesn't make mistakes except when Sid needs them to - or its Crystal,

He's not asking Crystal for a diagram of the apartments or if he is right - he is going on assumptions and doesn't want her to tell him he is wrong. So of course he isn't clearing it - and he knows Kenny and Tinfoil will take what he says as true, and it will fuel the conspiracy. The rest of us will not. He will still do nothing through proper channels - so he will again stoke his ego, again show Crystal he is her only true hero, and again accomplish nothing. And still never even attempt to contact those who could (if they would talk but probably not) provide him answers.

Blogger Nifong Supporter said...

Hah! Very good. My sharlog should be hopefully finished by the weekend's end. I have completely finished Part One... it's in the can (Hollywood term?). Stay tuned... smoking gun/crystal clear enlightenment is just days away.

The commenter who remarked about Aykia Hanes was basically touching upon the truth of the situation... which will be revealed with evidence and documentation in the upcoming sharlog. I certainly do not agree with much of what that commenter said... my intent was to merely note that his remarks about Ms. Hanes were in the ballpark.; June 19, 2015 at 7:50 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: John D. Smith said...
Sidney states: My take on the scenario presented is that the mugger is guilty of assault and robbery, and the drunken driver is guilty of manslaughter.

This example demonstrates why you should never, ever, not in a thousand years, ever act on your legal judgment. You are remarkable in your inability to grasp concepts. This example is simple, straightforward and raises no particularly complicated issues.

The mugger, in addition to assault and robbery, clearly is also guilty of murder. He is responsible for the chain of events that began with his commission of a crime. He committed assault and robbery. You got that right. He knocked the victim down. He is responsible for knocking the victim down into the gutter. Bad things can happen if you knock someone down into a gutter. The drunk driver came by and killed him. The mugger is responsible for the victim's death, even though he may not have intended to kill him, and, in this case, the victim would not have died if he had not been run over by the drunk driver. The mugger set the chain of events in motion and is responsible for all of the events.

Although, as explained above, the mugger is responsible for the victim's death and is guilty of murder, the drunk driver is ALSO responsible for the victim's death. He is guilty of manslaughter (although I believe that in some jurisdictions, he may be subject to more serious murder charges).

This example is interesting because it demonstrates that there can be MORE THAN ONE proximate cause. More than one person, in this case the mugger AND the drunk driver, are responsible for the victim's death. The punch was a proximate cause AND the vehicle running over the victim was a proximate cause.

Your egregiously incorrect answer to this example (as well as your egregiously incorrect answer to almost every legal question you have addressed) demonstrates why you should never act on your legal judgment. You applied the same incorrect thinking to Mangum's case (in all fairness, Mangum's case may be more interesting in some respects, but not in the conclusion) and convinced her that she had nothing to worry about, that the charges had no basis.

You didn't even attempt to research the law and understand it before you started giving her advice. You hadn't even identified the relevant case law. Even when Walt identified the most important cases, you had no interest in reading them, let alone understanding them. By the time we dragged you screaming and kicking into analyzing Welch, you had already acted on an uninformed conclusion. As we have seen many times, once you have reached a conclusion, you never admit a mistake.

Being a lawyer is more than filing motions, sitting in a law library and carrying a big briefcase filled with paper. Motions consist of more than writing a narrative. Being a lawyer is understanding the law, studying cases and making arguments based on law. You treat it like a big game. Mangum took your advice, acted as though she had no legal exposure and is sitting in prison.

At least you tried. Well done!

John D. Smith
New York, NY

Hey, John D. Smith.

The hypothetical scenario given was short on specifics, and depending on the specifics of the incident I would imagine that it would be possible to arrive at differing conclusions as to the proximate or direct cause of death. My response, for example, was with the understanding that the punch did not knock the man down in the street just as the car was driving by. Also, consideration should be given to whether or not an unimpaired driver would've likely run over the man in the street.

Get my drift? Too many variables and not enough specifics.; June 19, 2015 at 8:04 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
The jury acquitted on the larceny of chose in action - so not sure your point/issue with constantly bringing it up.

And, Mangum went into another room and got a knife and went after Milton Morgan - why wouldn't she do it to Daye?

The larceny of chose in action charge was purely malicious. There was never any probable cause for it and it shows the vendetta that drove the prosecution against Mangum. Prosecutors knew that none of the charge's elements were ever committed... Mangum did not illegally take the cashier's checks and she did not attempt to convert them for her benefit.

With regards to the Daye stabbing, did you ever consider that Daye lied about Mangum going into the kitchen and getting a knife? He lied to police about Mangum taking his money... why wouldn't he lie about Mangum attacking him out of the blue?; June 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Except it's not he truth.

1. Wrong on felony murder
2. Wrong on prior record
3. Wrong on prior abuse
4. Wrong on expert expenditures
5. Wrong on proximate cause
6. Wrong on Exculpatory Evidence.

You are wrong more than you are right.

Answer me this...
1. Am I right about Dr. Nichols committing perjury?
2. Am I right about Daye's spleen not being removed at surgery?
3. Am I right about Daye's initial intubation being esophageal?
... I could go on... but, I've got to get back home so I can work on the sharlog.; June 19, 2015 at 8:13 AM
Anonymous said...: You are avoiding the question and refusing to admit you are wrong.

You need to stop your abuse of Crystal - you are clearly an abuser taking advantage of her. It's sad, but you fit the mold exactly.; June 19, 2015 at 8:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...
.

"Answer me this...
1. Am I right about Dr. Nichols committing perjury?"

Obviously you are not because you have shown yourself incapable of recognizing truth.
"2. Am I right about Daye's spleen not being removed at surgery?"

I don't know. Were you there witnessing the surgery?

"3. Am I right about Daye's initial intubation being esophageal?"

Yes, but you are not right about saying that amounted to negligence. For one thing, in spite of the MD attached to your name, you do not have the credentials which would enabl you to recognize medical negligence.

"... I could go on... but, I've got to get back home so I can work on the sharlog."

No you couldn't. You are seeking refuge in your sharlog because you can't go on and on.; June 19, 2015 at 9:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"The commenter who remarked about Aykia Hanes was basically touching upon the truth of the situation... which will be revealed with evidence and documentation in the upcoming sharlog. I certainly do not agree with much of what that commenter said... my intent was to merely note that his remarks about Ms. Hanes were in the ballpark."

Which you are incapable of doing, since you can not distinguish between a ball park and a ball park hot dog.; June 19, 2015 at 9:25 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

I think the DA should investigate this case still, because either Duke is lying in their medical reports about what they did to Mr. Daye to cause his death, or the state's ME is lying about what he observed of Mr. Daye's deceased corpse and his investigation of the cause of death evidence. The two reports are too vastly different in cause of death that one or the other is a gross misrepresentation (re: fraudulent).

In addition, the Appeals Defense Attorney has claimed to the Appeal Judges a differing date and version of death than that given by Duke or the ME's. So, there are four competing versions of the cause of death that Ms. Mangum is responsible for. There is a fifth version that has yet to be determined: the truth. That is over abundance of reasonable doubt for a murder verdict.

Ms. Mangum can write the DA and ask for relief from being charged for four different versions of death that is currently in evidence in this case perhaps? Is that something that can be done again soon Dr. Harr with your assistance? Has the DA gotten back to yet about investigating the state ME autopsy evidence?

Also, is there evidence yet about the MAR that was submitted by the appeal defense attorney but rejected by Judge Hudson? Would this problem be suitable for a MAR filing if the DA refuses to investigate, so at least the right cause of death can be decided before charges are accrued unfairly to Ms. Mangum and without equal protection for any of the citizens of this state, including Ms. Mangum and all other potential victims (and past if this an issue that is more pervasive than was previously known or acknowledged in the justice system)?; June 19, 2015 at 11:28 AM
John D. Smith said...: Sidney,

I get your drift from your 8:04 comment. While I agree that the hypothetical was short of specifics and it is possible to provide scenarios to reach different conclusions, it is apparent from your answer that you either fail to understand the concept of proximate cause or you are unable to engage in honest discussion.

It was not necessary that the punch knocked down the victim just as the car was passing by. The important thing is that the punch started a chain of events. The mugger is responsible for all of the succeeding events in that chain unless there is an intervening cause. An intervening cause must completely break the chain. For example, if the punch knocked out the victim, and he lay in the gutter, dazed and unable to get up, and the drunk driver came by an hour later, the mugger is still guilty of murder. You apply the concept far too narrowly.

As I noted earlier, the example also demonstrate that there can be multiple proximate causes. Much of your analysis appears to require that one identify a single proximate cause. That is incorrect and not supported by the law.

You also failed to respond to my most significant criticism. It was unconscionable that you provided advice to Mangum on legal matters without having researched the law. You frequently reach an uninformed conclusion on a subject in which you have no training or experience, act on that uninformed conclusion and then refuse to admit error when your readers provide evidence showing you are wrong.

Mangum is paying for your mistakes.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 19, 2015 at 6:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney asks: did you ever consider that Daye lied about Mangum and getting a knife?

Yes. Of course I did. Daye's testimony was consistent with the physical evidence. Mangum's was not. As a result, I concluded that Mangum lied. Did you ever consider that?

Further, I do not believe that Daye lied to police when he said Mangum took his "money." I believe he used the term "money" in a broad sense that included cashier's checks. It was clear that he gave police more detailed information about the checks because they appeared to know what they were looking for.

Perhaps in another schlog you can compare Mangum's testimony with the physical evidence and accuse her of perjury as well. She certainly had the motivation to lie under oath.; June 19, 2015 at 6:42 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Dr. Harr:

Have you considered requesting that kenhyderal assist you in preparing your next sharlog? kenhyderal has no medical expertise but he does have the wherewithal to read, analyze and do research as well as seek informed opinion from people like yourself. Plus he has enough street smarts to know when someone is trying to snow him. With kenhyderal's help, the next sharlog will be the mind-blowing one that will herald the end of the travesty and free Crystal.; June 19, 2015 at 7:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Right now Ms. Mangum still has the possibility of receiving a new trial through the appeals attempt currently still awaiting decision. So the witnesses in the trial are still potential witnesses, and may be called to testify again right? What rights, if any, do the witnesses have that might be violated in your next sharlog? Have you examined THAT issue yet?

I think Duke has put everyone at risk at this point for not taking responsibility and accountability at the first sign of the discrepancy between their medical records and the state's ME autopsy report, especially with their awareness about this blog site documenting exactly what is happening in that case so that the issues in detail are available to ALL. What, if any, laws prevent Duke from putting EVERYONE at risk like they have in this case by ignoring consistently the issues raised on this blog that can harm ALL or ANY over which they have responsibility, accountability, and legal influence as it relates to this case?

What, if any, laws prevent the Duke / Durham / NC justice system from enabling, supporting, assisting, and allowing the obvious risk to the safety of ALL by Duke and the state ME system to continue as long as it has in this case?; June 20, 2015 at 3:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Obviously, if you assist Ms. Mangum in writing a letter herself to the DA asking for relief from the injustice and lack of equal protections for all as it pertains to the issues, or a MAR to a judge, SHE is the one empowered to defend herself in the legal system which has been lacking in this case to date, SHE is the one submitting the letters and a MAR in her own defense and for the equal protection of all which is more acceptable than you doing it for her directly in seems, and the issues are thus made public within the system in which they must be solved instead of asking the public to fix a system that they too are subjected too, so therefore have little power to fix, since it must be fixed from within the system by the system. This direction of dealing with the information and the issues seems to actually take into account the rights of ALL to equal protections in this case. If it is not a step in the due process sequence of things, than what is to deal with these issues within the system immediately, since ALL are denied equal protection in this case.

In addition, there is an article on the News and Observer website that you will be interested in reading today:

State Politics
June 19, 2015
Major fixes on medical examiners’ system stalling in General Assembly; June 20, 2015 at 5:00 AM
Walt said...: John D. Smith wrote: "... It was unconscionable that you[Sid] provided advice to Mangum on legal matters without having researched the law. You frequently reach an uninformed conclusion on a subject in which you have no training or experience, act on that uninformed conclusion and then refuse to admit error when your readers provide evidence showing you are wrong.

Mangum is paying for your mistakes."

Ding-Ding-Ding, Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner!

John D. Smith perfectly captures the harm Sid has done and is doing to Crystal. Sid reaches uninformed conclusions on subjects which he has no training or experience and encourages her to act on those erroneous conclusions. Again, with friends like Sid, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2015 at 7:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

I agree with kenhyderal supporter. It is time for kenhyderal to put up or shut up. He talks a good game but what has he done to help Crystal?

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996; June 20, 2015 at 7:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt - not only does he encourage her to act on them, he convinces her that her attorney's refusal to go along is a sign they can't be trusted and are working with the state to convict her. Again, classic abuser actions - isolate and keep her dependent on only him as her true guardian and savior.; June 20, 2015 at 8:02 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Sidney asks: did you ever consider that Daye lied about Mangum and getting a knife? --Yes. Of course I did. Daye's testimony was consistent with the physical evidence".............................. Evidence, carefully selected, to match Daye's statement. Evidence from the scene, consistent with Crystal's version of events was never presented to the Jury by Meier. Coggins Franks suggested Crystal was lying; Meier never did about contradictions in Daye's statement; June 20, 2015 at 8:23 AM
Anonymous said...: Details, Kenny, details.; June 20, 2015 at 8:25 AM
kenhyderal said...: The Anonymous poster who signs his posts Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996
is an imposter. He was not a classmate of Crystal and she has no knowledge of him; June 20, 2015 at 8:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

I asked you a couple of times previously to provide a full and detailed defense. Pretend you are the defense attorney and demonstrate exactly how you would have presented evidence.

Please start by posting the relevant portion of the transcript and show where and how you would have defended her differently. I want to to get into an extremely detailed presentation. Your general narrative is unconvincing. I am asking for specific details.

I have made this request previously, and you have ignored it completely. What premise am I making that is wrong?; June 20, 2015 at 8:30 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Details, Kenny, details"
:....................... Well let's start with the knives. Daye was an avid knife thrower. In his statement he did not admit to throwing knives.; June 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM
Anonymous said...: I do t want to ask piece meal for the details. Pretend you are the defense and provide your detailed defense, posting specific questions and posting all of the actual evidence you would have entered into court.; June 20, 2015 at 8:37 AM
kenhyderal said...: Were the circumstances surrounding the previous knife fight that Daye had been involved in ever investigated?; June 20, 2015 at 8:39 AM
Anonymous said...: This is an open case. Why would he do that?; June 20, 2015 at 8:40 AM
kenhyderal said...: Who is going to answer for the witnesses I would have called?; June 20, 2015 at 8:41 AM
Anonymous said...: I have never heard about it. Please post evidence.

A person who professes to believe in mystery rapists does not deserve the benefit of the doubt.; June 20, 2015 at 8:42 AM
Anonymous said...: This is an open case. Why would you be trolled into doing that (again)?; June 20, 2015 at 8:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Evidence, Kenny, detailed evidence.

I don't want to hear you describe evidence no one has ever seen. I want to see it myself.; June 20, 2015 at 8:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 8:40 and 8:43:

If you have objections to my request, the you should also have objections to the posts made by both Sidney and Kenny as well as posters critical of Mangum. I suggest that you tell them both to shut the fuck up.; June 20, 2015 at 8:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Details, Kenny, details. Evidence, Kenny, evidence. Specifics, Kenny, specifics.; June 20, 2015 at 8:49 AM
Anonymous said...: You wouldn't believe it if it happened right in front of you unless it met your agenda and world view would you? You seem very biased so far from the context of all your posts lately.; June 20, 2015 at 8:49 AM
Anonymous said...: I regard Kenny as a despicable liar. I don't trust a word he has to say. A person who professes a belief in mystery rapists with no proof deserves no respect.; June 20, 2015 at 8:53 AM
kenhyderal said...: Let me reiterate. I would have subpoenaed multiple witnesses; at least 10 from Duke Hospital, not withstanding Welch/Holsclaw rulings.. I am confident they would refute the idea that Daye died from "complications", at least in a medical sense, to the stab wound refuting the conclusion of Nicholls and Roberts. The reason no one has seen or heard evidence is because Meier did not present the needed witnesses.; June 20, 2015 at 8:54 AM
Anonymous said...: No, Kenny, that is not good enough. I don't just want you to tell me that you would have called additional witnesses. I want you to show me definitive proof that they would have testified as you claim.i want to see real evidence, not hear your assumptions as to what they would have said.

A person who professes a belief in mystery rapists does not get the benefit of the doubt. You are either a liar or a complete fool. In either case, I do not trust you.; June 20, 2015 at 8:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said...

I regard Kenny as a despicable liar. I don't trust a word he has to say. A person who professes a belief in mystery rapists with no proof deserves no respect.

June 20, 2015 at 8:53 AM

I know that is how you feel - it is obvious that you want him to do things that may harm Ms. Mangum's case in order that you can then denigrate him for everything he does to potentially harm or help Ms. Mangum regardless of reality, and you will also cyber-bully and troll him forever (probably) for being cyber-bullied and trolled by you (again). The more it harms Ms. Mangum though, the better to you ... right?; June 20, 2015 at 9:03 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous at 8:53 and 8:59: When you call me a liar why don't you give your real name?; June 20, 2015 at 9:04 AM
kenhyderal said...: By the way, the identity of the rapists is not a mystery to everyone. Some Duke Lacrosse Team members and some of their Party guests know their identity; June 20, 2015 at 9:08 AM
Anonymous said...: I am sick and tire of your statements as fact that Mangum was raped by mystery rapists at the lacrosse party. You have provided no proof and repeatedly refused to defend weaknesses in your preposterous theory.; June 20, 2015 at 9:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny what evidence did Meier not admit? He pointed out her injuries, pointed out bruises can occur later and they never went back, pointed out the pulled out hair, pointed out the cognac holder Daye had, pointed out the kicked in door, pointed out the knives all over, including the bedroom she could have gotten.

What physical evidence did Meier leave out that would have bolstered Crystal's version of how Daye was stabbed?; June 20, 2015 at 9:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny - those Duke hospital witnesses have nothing to do with self-defense. Don't change the subject. What would you have presented in self-defense that Meier didn't? Crystal talked about knife throwing.; June 20, 2015 at 9:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Your theory is getting better. The identity of the mystery rapists is a mystery to all except some mystery players and other mystery party guests. This is confirmed by the allegation of a pseudonymous poster's claim that he received an e-mail,from another pseudonymous poster, who has an anonymous friend who is one of the mystery players who knows the identity of the mystery rapists, so they are not mystery rapists to him.

Did I get that right?; June 20, 2015 at 9:32 AM
Anonymous said...: "kenhyderal said...

By the way, the identity of the rapists is not a mystery to everyone. Some Duke Lacrosse Team members and some of their Party guests know their identity

June 20, 2015 at 9:08 AM"

Again kenny provides proof of his incredible stupidity. It has been shown beyond doubt that no rape had occurred. Ergo there were no rapists.; June 20, 2015 at 10:00 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Let me reiterate. I would have subpoenaed multiple witnesses; at least 10 from Duke Hospital, not withstanding Welch/Holsclaw rulings.. I am confident they would refute the idea that Daye died from "complications", at least in a medical sense, to the stab wound refuting the conclusion of Nicholls and Roberts."

Prosecutor: "Objection, your honor, contributory negligence has no place in the criminal law."

Judge Ridgeway: "Mr Kenhyderal, do you want to be heard?"

Kenhyderal: "Well, you see, these cases they don't apply, it's just an injustice don't you see, well um Sid says something about all this, read it in his blog."

Judge Ridgeway: "Sustained, the case law is well settled, contributory negligence has no place in the criminal law. Sadly, you have just malpracticed your client by pursuing a legal theory that has no merit and frankly nothing to do with the case before us. It is painfully obvious that you are hell bent on sending the defendant to prison for the longest possible term. Never have I seen a more incompetent defense. Call your next witness."

"The reason no one has seen or heard evidence is because Meier did not present the needed witnesses."

No, that evidence does not exist. In fact, every doctor at Duke would have agreed with Roberts and Nichols. They are all skilled physicians who would reach the same conclusion. Had Crystal not stabbed Daye, he would not have been in the hospital, he would not have needed to be intubated and he would not have died. The fact that you refuse to accept the reality of the law is evidence of your malice toward Crystal and nothing more.

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2015 at 10:15 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 8:02 AM wrote: "Walt - not only does he encourage her to act on them, he convinces her that her attorney's refusal to go along is a sign they can't be trusted and are working with the state to convict her. Again, classic abuser actions - isolate and keep her dependent on only him as her true guardian and savior."

Correct you are Anonymous at 8:02. Sid and Kenny are classic abusers of Crystal. Probably not the only, but certainly among the worst. With friends like them, she really doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2015 at 10:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

How do you know that is what the doctors would answer? That is not what they would be asked since they would not be questioned like a medical examiner would when producing an autopsy report or testimony. They would be questioned about medical specifics, not legal ones, as it pertains to the complications. Those medical details and questions about the complications would be what they were called to testify about.; June 20, 2015 at 10:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Why do you assume they weren't asked? Witnesses are interviewed before trial, and if their answers aren't helpful, they aren't used. It's why it is ludicrous for Kenny and Sid to keep pretending Dr. Roberts didn't explain her report to Crystal and her attorneys - they all knew she wouldn't be helpful.; June 20, 2015 at 10:41 AM
Anonymous said...: It is reasonable to NOT have to make assumptions on the medical discrepancies since experts are expected to give that testimony in court - that is why.

There are currently 4 professional medical reports (including Dr. Harr's), one legal interpretation (the Appeal Briefs) that is so totally off the mark that it is a separate version of its own, and truth - which has yet to be decided between the five versions of what happened in court evidence and on this blog in sharlog form. If that isn't reasonable doubt, what is?

There is part of the law that allows for further examination and testimony built into the law - and that is the sole cause part of the law. Like the drunken driver, Duke does hold responsibility. How much is divided between the two - Ms. Mangum or Duke - has not been decided yet in a court of law. Nor has the sole cause aspect of the law been decided - and it is in question - and therefore it is reasonable to expect that it be decided in a court of law in order to convict someone for murder (per jury instructions). The jury did not hear the evidence, so cannot reasonably provide a verdict that cannot be doubted extensively, causing even more unreasonable harm to all.

Duke themselves could have ended this fiasco long ago and instead is still trying to cover it up with the assistance of the Appeal Defense Attorney.; June 20, 2015 at 11:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Where are your details of your self defense theory? Are you running away again?; June 20, 2015 at 11:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 11:02 states: Duke does hold responsibility.

I agree. Duke has civil responsibility. Daye's family had a civil,claim. I do not know whether they pursued it. Mangum remains criminally responsible.; June 20, 2015 at 11:33 AM
Anonymous said...: No she doesn't remain criminally responsible without examining all the facts first that leaves no reasonable doubt, because the criminal law holds that if Duke is solely responsible for their civil law malpractice in this case, then Ms. Mangum is NOT responsible for murder. At the least, the jury needs to be presented with reasonable evidence in order to give a reasonable verdict by law.

If this was happening to you, what would you do? seriously ... especially because do NOT think for one moment that if Duke does this to Ms. Mangum and Mr. Daye they will Not do it to you or another too ... because they will if it fits their agenda ... that is a proven fact about Duke.; June 20, 2015 at 11:48 AM
Anonymous said...: You are still just a blithering idiot.; June 20, 2015 at 11:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 11:48 states : the criminal law holds that if Duke is solely responsible for their civil law malpractice in this case, then Ms. Mangum is NOT responsible for murder

This is incorrect. The law holds precisely the opposite. Jordan, welch and Holsclaw , all of which have been cited frequently on this blog hold that medical malpractice does NOT break the chain of events.

Unless you are able to cite one or more court cases that are consistent with your statement, I ask that you apologize for your error.; June 20, 2015 at 12:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Perhaps your interpretation of the law is not the same as what the judge declared at the beginning of the trial. That seems to be the discrepancy in this argument, eh? What the judge said, and what is said on this blog. I am going by what the judge said the law was. Does that clear up the confusion?; June 20, 2015 at 12:05 PM
Anonymous said...: I would not have stabbed Daye.; June 20, 2015 at 12:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 12:06:

I had no confusion. The judge's instructions were the model instructions based on welch. They are fully consistent with the discussion on this blog. You are obviously confused.

I suggest that in addition to apologizing for the error in your 11:48 post, you also apologize for the error in your 12:06 post. You do not help Crystal by misstating the law and falsely inflating her hopes.; June 20, 2015 at 12:10 PM
Anonymous said...: I will not. There is reasonable doubt as I have explained. I stand by what I have said.; June 20, 2015 at 12:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Do as you wish.

Insisting on your personal interpretation of the law will do nothing to get Mangum released.; June 20, 2015 at 12:16 PM
Anonymous said...: The blog version of the law is a personal interpretation of the law, not my interpretation based on what the judge determined the law to be at the beginning of the trial. You are following what Walt says, which is very biased and wrong in this case. I am following what the law is and what is being done in the justice system in spite of the law in this case. You want to see Ms. Mangum face the death penalty in this case which is the ultimate of bias considering the argument.; June 20, 2015 at 12:23 PM
Anonymous said...: I had a typo in 1. It should started: my interpretation of the law in this case is based on my review of case law, including Welch, Holsclaw and others...

You still owe my an apology.; June 20, 2015 at 12:37 PM
Anonymous said...: My comment just vanished. Have others had that problem?; June 20, 2015 at 12:38 PM
Anonymous said...: for what?; June 20, 2015 at 12:39 PM
Anonymous said...: i have made no false statements, sorry

what false assumptions about you have i made?; June 20, 2015 at 12:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 12:44:

You sated at 12:23 that "You want to see Ms. Mangum face the death penalty in this case which is the ultimate of bias considering the argument."

I am opposed to the death penalty. Your statement is thus categorically false. I ask that you apologize for that false characterization.

You also falsely described the review I did in intepreting the law. For that mischaracterization, i also ask that you apologize.; June 20, 2015 at 12:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Actually I didn't read the review and now the post is gone - I'm done for now and have said what I meant.

I thought you were the person who thought Ms. Mangum deserved to face the death penalty that I was talking with earlier actually. You argue the same, so that IS confusing.

Anyway, if you are going by how Walt interprets the law and not by how the judge declared at the beginning of the trial, which is what I am going by, than we will just have to agree to disagree.

Thanks.; June 20, 2015 at 12:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous June 20, 2015 at 11:02 AM:

"There are currently 4 professional medical reports (including Dr. Harr's)"

Sidney Harr's medical qualifications, or lack thereof, are a matter of public record. He graduated from Medical School in 1974. He completed an internship. He never completed a residency. He never achieved board certification in any Medical Specialty. He retired from Medicine in 1971, 17 years after graduation from Medical School.

from http://criminaldefense.homestead.com/experts.html

"An expert may be defined as one who has specialized knowledge by education, training, experience, or skill. (Either formal training or experience will do.)"

No court in the land would accept him as a knowledgeable medical expert, especially in the areas of forensic pathology or surgery, areas in which he has no formal training or experience.

Dr. Anonymous.; June 20, 2015 at 1:04 PM
Anonymous said...: My comment vanished. I lost it twice.; June 20, 2015 at 1:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Why are my posts vanishing?; June 20, 2015 at 1:07 PM
Anonymous said...: " Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous 11:02 states: Duke does hold responsibility.

I agree. Duke has civil responsibility. Daye's family had a civil,claim. I do not know whether they pursued it. Mangum remains criminally responsible.

June 20, 2015 at 11:33 AM"

This, I admit is speculation, based on the aggressive tactics of trial lawyers today-many appearing on TV saying, we will fight to get you all that you deserve, and you won't have to pay unless you correct. That is a way of saying, we do this on a contingency fee basis, we take a percentage of whatever award you might win. That percentage is usually 33 1/3 per cent.

I think it is likely trial lawyers may have approached the Daye family, reviewed the case, then turned it down because they would not collect anything, that the Daye family did not have a case for malpractice against Duke University Medical Center.; June 20, 2015 at 1:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 12:58 states: Anyway, if you are going by how Walt interprets the law and not by how the judge declared at the beginning of the trial, which is what I am going by, than we will just have to agree to disagree.

As I stated in two posts that have vanished, I did my own research, read cases, read law articles and came to the same conclusion as Walt. I want to apologize for falsely accusing me of blindly following Walt's lead in reaching that conclusion. I also agree with Judge ridgeway's instruction which is consistent with my interpretation. I want to to apologize for falsely accusing me of rejecting the instructions.

You owe me apologies.; June 20, 2015 at 1:20 PM
Anonymous said...: i'm sorry you feel that way

are you ok?; June 20, 2015 at 1:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 1:13:

This is speculation as well. I suspect that DUMC may have offered some settlement to Daye's family because they did not want adverse publicity. Esophageal intubation is a serious error.; June 20, 2015 at 1:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 1:23:

thank you for asking. No. I am not OK. This blog ate two of my posts, which simply vanished.; June 20, 2015 at 1:25 PM
Anonymous said...: I had have posts vanish before. I can't understand why.; June 20, 2015 at 1:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said...

"Anonymous 1:13:

This is speculation as well. I suspect that DUMC may have offered some settlement to Daye's family because they did not want adverse publicity."

That is possible. In a wrongful death lawsuit it is rare, if ever, that the plaintiffs would accept a settlement without representation from an attorney. I think, if Duke did offer them a settlement, Mr. Daye's family would believe they had a case and would have retained an attorney.

"Esophageal intubation is a serious error."

True. But medical errors do not always rise to the level of negligence. There was something published in the New England Journal of Medicine, about 24-25 years ago, the Harvard Study, a study of iatrogenic injury in a group of patients hospitalized in New York in the late80s-early 90s. In a group of 30,000 patients, they found fewer than 1500 cases of iatrogenic injury, fewer than 300 of which were due to negligence.

To establish medical malpractice, a plaintiff has to establish that there was negligence. There is the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, meaning that the incident had to be so gross there was no explanation other than negligence. That did not apply in the case of Mr. Daye, judging from the records sid published.

Mr. Daye was being worked up for an intra abdominal infection, a highly probable event considering he suffered penetrating wounds of his stomach and colon which were treated after a delay because of the time it took to get him into the hospital for treatment. The attending doctors had contrast inserted into his stomach via an NG tube, prior to performing an abdominal cat scan, which is reasonable procedure. He vomited and aspirated, all in a matter of less than a minute. The esophageal intubation happened, according to Dr. Roberts, the defense expert, because visualizing the larynx was hindered by the presence of the vomitus.

It was an error but it did not rise to the level of negligence. Neither sid nor kenny is capable of determining it was negligence, because neither of them has any experience in managing such a scenario.

Res ipsa loquitur would have been something like a surgeon amputating the wrong leg.

June 20, 2015 at 1:23 PM; June 20, 2015 at 2:00 PM
Anonymous said...: The patient is left brain dead and is taken off life support in a week and you don't call that negligence (especially in THIS case)? Get real.; June 20, 2015 at 2:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

How is the detailed self defense presentation coming?; June 20, 2015 at 2:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 2:07:

Why is esophageal intubation worse in this case than another case?; June 20, 2015 at 2:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Do you mean why is it negligent in this murder case involving Ms. Mangum (or any other possible murder case), especially by Duke in Durham? ??? Do you really need an answer to that?; June 20, 2015 at 2:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Yes. I do.; June 20, 2015 at 2:53 PM
Anonymous said...: You think about it, get back later with your ideas of why it might, and maybe someone will want to argue with you about it at some other time. Thanks.; June 20, 2015 at 2:56 PM
Anonymous said...: " Anonymous Anonymous said...

The patient is left brain dead and is taken off life support in a week and you don't call that negligence (especially in THIS case)? Get real.

June 20, 2015 at 2:07 PM"

Because it wasn't.

What are your credentials to say it was negligence.; June 20, 2015 at 2:57 PM
Anonymous said...: " Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous 2:07:

Why is esophageal intubation worse in this case than another case?

June 20, 2015 at 2:16 PM"

Better or worse is not the issue. The issue is whether or noot negligence was involved. It wasn't; June 20, 2015 at 2:59 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " "It was an error but it did not rise to the level of negligence. Neither sid nor kenny is capable of determining it was negligence, because neither of them has any experience in managing such a scenario"........ My understanding is that if this error failed to be recognized in as timely fashion before anoxia precipitated heart and brain injury then this failure constitutes serious medical malpractice. I posted a study in the past on this blog which makes this finding and I will try to find it and repost it.; June 20, 2015 at 3:07 PM
Anonymous said...: No one has provided any credible explanation why the care Daye received should be examined more closely than any other unexpected death in a hospital.; June 20, 2015 at 3:09 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal:
"Anonymous said: " "It was an error but it did not rise to the level of negligence. Neither sid nor kenny is capable of determining it was negligence, because neither of them has any experience in managing such a scenario"........ My understanding is that if this error failed to be recognized in as timely fashion before anoxia precipitated heart and brain injury then this failure constitutes serious medical malpractice. I posted a study in the past on this blog which makes this finding and I will try to find it and repost it.

June 20, 2015 at 3:07 PM"

This is just an admission that you do not understand the concepts of medical negligence and medical mal practice. You can read all the studies you want. That is just another form of talking the talk. You have to be able to walk the walk. All you do is trip and fall flat on your face.; June 20, 2015 at 3:15 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt ( in playing Judge Ridgeway said: "Sustained, the case law is well settled, contributory negligence has no place in the criminal law. Sadly, you have just malpracticed your client by pursuing a legal theory that has no merit and frankly nothing to do with the case before us. It is painfully obvious that you are hell bent on sending the defendant to prison for the longest possible term. Never have I seen a more incompetent defense. Call your next witness."
You, Your Honor, by making this un-judicious statement have just provided grounds for a mistrial. Walt,the interpretation of what case law holds as given by Anonymous @11:48 makes more common sense to me. If your interpretation is correct in all circumstances then the law truly "is an ass; June 20, 2015 at 3:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

The interpretation from 11:48 has been shown to be incorrect.; June 20, 2015 at 3:39 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "How is the detailed self defense presentation coming"............ Evidence showed Reginald Daye had a penchant for throwing knives. Throwing knives at people can be lethal. Daye said Crystal threw knives at him. He said, she said. Ladies and gentlemen of the Jury I ask you why would a drunken jealous enraged Reginald Day twice the size of Crystal and who admittedly tried to stop her from leaving him suddenly jump off of her, stop his attack and try to flee from his own apartment? What information is available concerning the previous knifing Daye experienced. Why did saintly Reggie keep brass knuckles? This illegal weapon can inflict serious injury on anyone struck. Did this man have a penchant for violence. Well I could keep going but as you all know I'm not a Lawyer. I'm of the opinion that any competent Lawyer given the time to properly prepare could have raised reasonable doubt.; June 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

This is a first step.

Please provide links to the following:

1. The evidence that Daye was into knife throwing.
2. The transcript of the trial.
3. Daye's statement. I want to ensure you are not mischaracterizing his decision to "flee" the apartment.
4. The evidence of Daye's previous knifing.
5. The evidence that Daye had a penchant for violence. Remember, his "criminal history" contains no convictions and is not admissible.

Thanks.; June 20, 2015 at 4:22 PM
Anonymous said...: kennny, in your latest comment you again show incredible stupidity.

All that information you give comes from no source other than crystal.

crystal is hardly a credible witness.

Like you are hardly have the credentials to be an expert medical witness, even though you incredibly stupidly believe you are.; June 20, 2015 at 4:23 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Walt,the interpretation of what case law holds as given by Anonymous @11:48 makes more common sense to me".

Here you are presuming as fact something which has not been established as fact, that you are an expert on case law.

How incredibly stupid you are.; June 20, 2015 at 4:26 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " Walt,the interpretation of what case law holds as given by Anonymous @11:48 makes more common sense to me."

That doesn't surprise me. You are a very superficial student of the law. Anonymous at 11:48 without citation to authority (because there is none) tells you what you want to hear. Instead of listening only to what you want to hear try learning something. Of course, you won't. That is the fundamental weakness of your argument. You, like Sid, refuse to learn. If that harmed no one else, no one would care. Unfortunately, your words and opinions do harm Crystal.

"If your interpretation is correct in all circumstances then the law truly "is an ass."

Without citation to authority. Weak, shallow and superficial. Not to mention plagiarism. I honestly didn't think you could do better. But, you have confirmed our suspicions, again.

With friends like Kenny, Crystal really doesn't need any enemies.; June 20, 2015 at 8:04 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Not to mention plagiarism. ". Walt in a previous post on June 18th I gave citation to that quotation while on the same topic. I didn't see the need to repeat the citation.; June 20, 2015 at 9:22 PM
kenhyderal said...: 1.The evidence that Daye was into knife throwing............................ Crystal's son could have been called on, if it could be done in a way not stressful for the boy, that Daye was teaching him knife throwing. 3.Daye's statement. I want to ensure you are not mischaracterizing his decision to "flee" the apartment...... His statement is published at the beginning of this thread. 4.The evidence of Daye's previous knifing................ This is found in both Nicholls and Roberts report. 5. The evidence that Daye had a penchant for violence. His statement about the bathroom door and the hair as well as his possession of brass knuckles. I have no transcript but the entire trial can be found on Youtube.; June 20, 2015 at 9:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Thank you for your responses.

1. Please post a notarized affidavit from Crystal's son. Statements that someone "could have" been called and that they "would have" confirmed something is not evidence.
2. I know the entire trial is on YouTube. That is inefficient and I don't have 5 days. If you and Sidney wanted help in freeing Mangum, you would have found a way to make information available in a usable way.
3. Where is it published at the beginning of this thread? I looked and couldn't find it.
4. Can you publish the links to the Nichols and Roberts reports. I know Sidney has them in his shlogs, but I don't know when. Sidney makes it as difficult as possible to do research.
5. The bathroom door and hair are in evidence. Meier raised them. The brass knuckles were in the apartment. This claim adds little. You need to build it out. Interviews with prior girlfriends that he beat up are needed. Again, notarized affidavits are evidence.

Thanks for your help.; June 21, 2015 at 3:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Are you insane?; June 21, 2015 at 3:56 AM
Anonymous said...: No. I am not insane.

I am willing to be convinced that Mangum acted in self defense. At this point, I believe the jury made the correct decision. I though Mangum made a terrible witness.

Kenny keeps telling us that Meier did a poor job and it should have been easy to convince the jury on self defense. He has not been convincing on this board, in large part because his posts are limited to telling a high level narrative, with no detail. He needs to provide details and evidence. Otherwise, he convinces no one.; June 21, 2015 at 4:04 AM
Anonymous said...: This is an open case still - you are aware of that right?; June 21, 2015 at 4:09 AM
Anonymous said...: Are you serious? The state's ME made false and misleading statements on the first autopsy report. The DA needs to get that investigated through the SBI. Ms. Mangum's lawyers need to educate themselves in the medical details and discrepancies of the case in order to provide equal protection and defense assistance for Ms. Mangum. The DA is well aware of the issues between Duke and Ms. Mangum, and should find any hint of discrepancy by Duke or the ME system or the public defender's system suspect in this case (instead of ignoring all the issues and discrepancies and directly supporting it).

Ya'll act like it is Dr. Harr's job to do all that when there is a system in place who's job it is to do all that and it is obviously broken so ya'll complain about it consistently loud and clear for the lacrosse case, yet cheer it on in this case. This case just shows ya'll loud and clear that it is Duke and the NC system that need fixin' for ALL, not just the lacrosse team. Of course, as long as Ms. Mangum is harmed by Duke and the system, ya'll don't mind when you are too then. Right?; June 21, 2015 at 4:29 AM
Anonymous said...: What the frack is going on here? I leave for a little while and come back hoping to be elucidated by a nice shlog, but all I find are these evil, mean, hate-filled, nonsensical, crazy making comments from a bunch of insane hate-crime blog mongers.

blah

blah

blah; June 21, 2015 at 4:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 4:09:

I am aware the conviction is being appealed. I am also aware that Sidney and Kenny discus the case extensively. I am also aware they you do not object to their disc union. Why do you apply a different standard to my inquiry?; June 21, 2015 at 4:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Maybe she feels she has a right to defend herself in her own home. It is a law that all are empowered with that right in their own domain now. She was just doing as the law dictates is her right.

With the abuse she suffered through the entire of the Duke rape case, anything that triggers that same feeling of right to defend themselves in their own domain in a similar environment could be considered the proximate cause of any actions taken after that trigger is 'pulled' (as in Mr. Daye assaulting her in the bathroom to start the violent encounter) if, as if quite obvious, Ms. Mangum suffers from PTSD or similar illnesses in similar situations. That should have been part of the expert's testimony who was not allowed to provide expert defense evidence and assistance because she did not hold a professional degree, even though she was professionally contracted to instruct police squadrons in how to deal with victims and issues in similar situations.

That expert witness, or a qualified replacement, needs to be a part of this case and trial if the judgement about Ms. Mangum's actions after she was attacked by Mr. Daye in the bathroom in her own domain, and in such a way as to be very similar to the Duke Lacrosse case, is to be judged fairly and equally - since that is the issue in this and the Milton case obviously (or at least with reasonable probability and factual basis for intent and quilt as applied by law).

This issue should have been included in the Defense Appeal Brief already.; June 21, 2015 at 4:38 AM
Anonymous said...: You don't even 'get' the premise of the post to begin with.

Another reason why the issue needs to be included in the Defense Appeal Brief.

The jury needs to hear from Ms. Mangum's expert witnesses in order for the case to be understood to a reasonable level to even be judged by a jury to begin with.

It is Ms. Mangum whom is being judged for her actions, so therefore, her actions presumably stem from her, sick or not. Her illness, if a legally reasonable cause of any of her actions which by all accounts it seems to be, is therefore a critical matter to understand when asked to judge her actions.

Mr. Daye's intoxication could be considered the proximate cause of his drunken violent behavior in the same manner and his requirement for DT analysis and treatment and subsequent need for the ultimately fatal intubation malpractice stems in actuality from his illness of excessive intoxication and need for detoxification or re-intoxication to maintain health as well.

That is the factual series of complications and proximate causes in evidence in this case for the actions that happened that ended in Mr. Daye's ultimate death. The deletion and non-representation of these facts are all issues that need to be included in the Defense Appeal Brief. Perhaps these expert witnesses were not called because in evidence is the fact that Mr. Daye's intoxication was the proximate cause of his actual death, and understanding this nature of these illnesses, that they can be proximate causes of death or self-defensive actions - even if by ultimate deadly malpractice.

This issue is so obvious when it deals with Duke and the Mangum cases as Duke is one of the leaders in all these areas of expertise, so as always, there is no excuse for any of this not to be handled more professionally and with greater ethical concern for ALL then Duke has done and continues to do in these cases.

Again ... their obvious evil shines through for they do not even have the claim to innocence by ignorance ... in any of these cases - the kicker as always when it pertains to Duke and their claims to expertise in any area (especially ones where they receive billions of federal and state tax, and public and private non-profit donations and funds for research and treatment and expert witness and leadership). As always, Duke has no excuses.

That is why they are intentionally malicious in their corrupted and negligent actions that cause harm to any and can therefore be considered evil, (if other than by association of their beloved mascot is in any way needed). They have no excuses, least of all ignorance. Other than that, by law, they are responsible and can be held accountable.; June 21, 2015 at 4:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Obviously there is a flaw in the system when Duke can kill Mr. Daye to frame Ms. Mangum for murder, and the ME can lie about Duke killing Mr. Daye in order that indeed Ms. Mangum does get charged and convicted for a murder by malpractice that Duke committed, and then the state's defense appeal attorney lies about the date of death in order to coverup it all up. What makes you think Duke wouldn't do the same to you Walt since you seem to think it is ok for them to do it to others?

I'm waiting to see what the appeal judges decide on Rule 403(b) Walt since I've watched you totally ignore the issue above that puts EVERYONE in the state at risk of death and/or murder by malpractice at Duke's and their affiliates and followers hands. Of course the state gov is in that category in large part - in many if not all areas in the NC state gov. - so ... probably most who understand that can see where the issue mentioned above is of more dire importance to all than the 403(b) issue. Why don't you understand that?; June 21, 2015 at 4:42 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 4:29 AM wrote: "Are you serious? The state's ME made false and misleading statements on the first autopsy report. The DA needs to get that investigated through the SBI."

Dr. Nichols was investigated by the SBI. The Mangum case was not one where they found any problems.

"Ms. Mangum's lawyers need to educate themselves in the medical details and discrepancies of the case in order to provide equal protection and defense assistance for Ms. Mangum."

They did. The defense obtained the services of a respected and independent medical examiner (IME). What Sid knows and has reported about this case came from Dr. Roberts, the IME. Defense counsel then made the wise decision to not call Dr. Roberts as a witness at trial because her conclusion was that Daye died as a result of complications brought about from a stab wound inflicted by Crystal. Sid breached Crystal's confidence and told the state about the Defense IME's conclusion. The defense, like the state and the trial judge are quite aware of the pattern jury instructions and the case law, Jordan, Welch and Holesclaw which hold that contributory negligence has no place in the criminal law, and that medical malpractice is not an intervening cause to break the chain of proximate cause. Once they knew that the situation was one of contributory negligence, defense counsel and Crystal wisely decided to pursue a different defense.

"The DA is well aware of the issues between Duke and Ms. Mangum, and should find any hint of discrepancy by Duke or the ME system or the public defender's system suspect in this case (instead of ignoring all the issues and discrepancies and directly supporting it)."

No one is ignoring anything. The investigation was done, twice. Once by the State Medical Examiner and once by the Defense IME. Both concluded that this was, at worst, a situation of medical malpractice. Knowing the law, as lawyers do, they concluded that malpractice (contributory negligence) has no place in the criminal law.

If you don't like the law, then give us a reason why Jordan should be overruled and the pattern jury instruction should be changed. Stop whining, stop claiming there is a massive conspiracy and make an argument.

Walt-in-Durham; June 21, 2015 at 5:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said...

"What the frack is going on here? I leave for a little while and come back hoping to be elucidated by a nice shlog,"

A false hope, since sidney has never elucidated anything other than he is incredibly stupid.

"but all I find are these evil, mean, hate-filled, nonsensical, crazy making comments from a bunch of insane hate-crime blog mongers.

blah

blah

blah

June 21, 2015 at 4:30 AM"

Boy are you stressed.; June 21, 2015 at 5:09 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 4:42 wrote: "Obviously there is a flaw in the system when Duke can kill Mr. Daye to frame Ms. Mangum for murder, and the ME can lie about Duke killing Mr. Daye in order that indeed Ms. Mangum does get charged and convicted for a murder by malpractice that Duke committed, and then the state's defense appeal attorney lies about the date of death in order to coverup it all up. What makes you think Duke wouldn't do the same to you Walt since you seem to think it is ok for them to do it to others?"

Take a deep breath and calm yourself. Crystal is going to have to accept some personal responsibility here. She did stab a guy. There is no evidence of a medical murder. What there is, is evidence of malpractice (Contributory Negligence). As we know, contributory negligence has no place in criminal law. Thus, what you need to do is construct an argument to overturn that well settled and long standing precedent. That's what sane people do who want to make a difference.

"I'm waiting to see what the appeal judges decide on Rule 403(b) Walt since I've watched you totally ignore the issue above that puts EVERYONE in the state at risk of death and/or murder by malpractice at Duke's and their affiliates and followers hands."

That is the beginning of an argument. So, let's explore that. Your contention is that by keeping contributory negligence out of the criminal law, a door is opened to allow greater harm by negligent subsequent actors to do harm. More harm than the initial criminal act.

Now, show us with evidence how many acts of contributory negligence there are subsequent to criminal acts. Next explain how those who are subsequently negligent are more culpable than the initial criminal. Tell us how many acts of crime are not subject to contributory negligence. Finally, balance the need to deter, punish and rehabilitate criminals with the need to deter, punish and rehabilitate the negligent.

Walt-in-Durham; June 21, 2015 at 5:20 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously walt - get over yourself already

blah; June 21, 2015 at 5:23 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 5:23:

I think you are doing exactly the correct thing. You can pretend that your interpretation of the law is correct. Then you can pretend Crystal is free.; June 21, 2015 at 5:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny - you still aren't saying anything relevant on self-defense that wasn't done.

Crystal testified about the knife throwing and the martial arts. Ok - no one, not even Daye, disputes he went into a rage that day and kicked in the door and drug her out by her hair. The entire issue, as has been stated to you repeatedly but you refuse to acknowledge, is that Crystal said Daye was on top of her, which would have been self-defense - Daye said he let her go and she ran into another room to get a knife and came back.

How do the brass knuckles, and knife throwing (which he apparently wasn't very good at since he seemingly never hit her with one of the many knives he threw at her) change that?

Crystal had a history of doing what Daye said (that's why the Walker testimony was so damning), and the physical evidence/blood in the hall and lack of marks on Crystal - pointed more to his story than hers.

You and Sid keep obsessing on what happened at Duke - that is not how Crystal gets a Not Guilty. If she does get a new trial, you need to stop telling her to obsess over Duke, and start focusing on working with her attorneys on self-defense.; June 21, 2015 at 6:50 AM
Anonymous said...: g... your posts as usual hold no meaning at all except that you are an evil duke troll from kc's blog.

Why don't ya'll (you especially) stop trolling Kenny and copying and pasting his or anyone else's past posts to start new trolls and arguments against your own trolled cut and paste posts, and then screaming quit whining or quit trolling when a reply is given in defense or asking you to stop or whatever? Seriously.

blah

Kenny, this is an open case - you do realize that right?; June 21, 2015 at 7:18 AM
A Lawyer said...: Obviously there is a flaw in the system when Duke can kill Mr. Daye to frame Ms. Mangum for murder,

The questions that have been asked repeatedly, but no one will answer:

1. Who at Duke decided to murder Mr. Daye?

2. What was their motive?

3. How were their instructions to murder Mr. Daye communicated to the medical team?

4. Why did the medical team agree to commit murder?; June 21, 2015 at 8:41 AM
Anonymous said...: "Obviously there is a flaw in the system when Duke can kill Mr. Daye to frame Ms. Mangum for murder, and the ME can lie about Duke killing Mr. Daye in order that indeed Ms. Mangum does get charged and convicted for a murder by malpractice that Duke committed, and then the state's defense appeal attorney lies about the date of death in order to coverup it all up. What makes you think Duke wouldn't do the same to you Walt since you seem to think it is ok for them to do it to others?"; June 21, 2015 at 9:06 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 9:06 AM wrote: "Obviously there is a flaw in the system when Duke can kill Mr. Daye to frame Ms. Mangum for murder, and the ME can lie about Duke killing Mr. Daye in order that indeed Ms. Mangum does get charged and convicted for a murder by malpractice that Duke committed, and then the state's defense appeal attorney lies about the date of death in order to coverup it all up."

Wow, is that a run-on sentence or what? Try using a period to separate thoughts. It makes what you write more readable, and possibly more persuasive. First the flaw you complain of is not obvious. Two M.D.s with a great deal of experience and expertise reached the opposite conclusion. Murder is the intentional taking of the life of another person. The focus on intent. Medical malpractice is negligence. Negligence being an accident or conduct that falls below the standard of care in the community. One cannot commit murder by negligence. To claim such is nonsense.

"What makes you think Duke wouldn't do the same to you Walt since you seem to think it is ok for them to do it to others?"

I have never said it is OK to commit medical malpractice. It's not. However, the penalty for malpractice is not criminal, it is civil. I think that is adequate deterrence for any medical provider. What I have written, time and time again, is the rule of our law that says contributory negligence has no place in criminal law. I have given the citation to authority for that doctrine. If you disagree with it, then make an argument to overturn. Of course you should keep in mind that you have to balance the harm that will be done by allowing violent criminals free reign when good physicians and surgeons make a mistake.

Of course that's not what you want to do. You are so shallow that you cannot construct a persuasive argument. You just want your immediate view confirmed. Even if that confirmation is a lie. I won't lie to you Anonymous.

Walt-in-Durham; June 21, 2015 at 10:44 AM
Anonymous said...: "Obviously there is a flaw in the system when Duke can kill Mr. Daye to frame Ms. Mangum for murder, and the ME can lie about Duke killing Mr. Daye in order that indeed Ms. Mangum does get charged and convicted for a murder by malpractice that Duke committed, and then the state's defense appeal attorney lies about the date of death in order to coverup it all up."; June 21, 2015 at 12:12 PM
guiowen said...: Tinfoil,
No answers for you until you answer my questions of June 2.; June 21, 2015 at 12:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Still love how Crystal makes mistakes (even when they are deliberate lies), everyone else lies, even when it's clearly just a mistake.

That's why no one takes you are your paranoid rantings seriously.; June 21, 2015 at 12:33 PM
Anonymous said...: 12:33 PM

Your rant and inability to see the truth in this case because of your bias and hatred for Ms. Mangum won't stop that flawed system and Duke from mangling ya'll and Ms. Mangum, and anyone else they want in the system again like they did and are currently doing. What makes you think it does?; June 21, 2015 at 1:17 PM
Anonymous said...: you can make that no posts at all regardless of whether they are answers or not g...

thanks; June 21, 2015 at 1:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Where is the sharlog? I thought Sidney promised it today.; June 21, 2015 at 2:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Don't hate Mangum at all - I just realize that she did stab Daye, and self-defense was argued, and lost - so the jury has spoken.; June 21, 2015 at 2:40 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Kenny, this is an open case - you do realize that right?"... Yes I guess your right; since the Justice System there is not about getting at the truth. Instead, it's like a video war game where the object is to gain an advantage over your adversary by chicanery and craftiness. Don't reveal your strategy that will advantage the opposing side. State Attorneys play the game and so do Attorneys for the rich and powerful. Court appointed Attorneys show up for the game but don't care whether they win or lose; June 21, 2015 at 3:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Have you posted the links I asked you to provide? I did not see the,.; June 21, 2015 at 3:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, you are still an idiot - and have yet to identify what Meier should have done differently on self-defense. Your constant whining and defamation of court appointed attorneys proves how pathetic and sad you really are and how you don't have any real arguments.

Sid is the one who leaked the strategy and information, by the way - not her attorneys who just showed up for the game. And, you do realize that most of those Court Appointed attorneys do private work too - so yeah, they care about wins and losses - it's how they get more business.

Your idiocy is astounding.; June 21, 2015 at 3:35 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Yes I guess your right; since the Justice System there is not about getting at the truth. Instead, it's like a video war game where the object is to gain an advantage over your adversary by chicanery and craftiness. Don't reveal your strategy that will advantage the opposing side."

You have described exactly how mike nifong treated the innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse Players. I guess that strategy is ok with you if the defendants are innocent, falsely accused white men.; June 21, 2015 at 3:56 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said; "you do realize that most of those Court Appointed attorneys do private work too - so yeah, they care about wins and losses "............. Yeah with private clients of their choice who they can charge a full tariff but not for marginalized indigent clients they are appointed to by the Court where the compensation is less and insufficient resources are provided for to properly investigate and defend. Visiting a poor minority defendant in gaol is not something they are eager to do regularly . It takes away from their more lucrative private practice.; June 21, 2015 at 9:38 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Have you posted the links I asked you to provide? I did not see the".................. No links are required. Just go to the head of this tread and click on the photo. That will take you to a chronicle of all documents relevant to this case. I do believe some bloggers were having a problem opening this on some types of devices. As far as the transcript goes even Anne Petersen had trouble getting it causing her to seek two extensions from the Court of Appeals.; June 21, 2015 at 9:46 PM
kenhyderal said...: As far as laying out what I would consider the defence that should of happened I'm taking the caution of Anonymous @ 7:18 and not commenting on that here .; June 21, 2015 at 9:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Thanks. That was actually a cut,pasted,plagerized posting by another poster of a previous posting by someone other than themselves (as well as most of those posts in that recent segment of blog posts). It is a repeated occurance on this blog in case you haven't noticed. Being more careful with what you say on this blog about Ms. Mangum is definetely something that certainly couldn't harm her, especially since the case is still open, and other factors involving the welfare of all.; June 21, 2015 at 10:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said...

Don't hate Mangum at all - I just realize that she did stab Daye, and self-defense was argued, and lost - so the jury has spoken.

June 21, 2015 at 2:40 PM

Yes, but it was a corrupted jury seated with three Duke affiliated persons who were illegally influenced by one juror's command to not make Durham (re: duke/durham) look bad, especially since the judge did NOT allow for that juror to be removed. Not many would take those jurors' decisions seriously in this case. Why do you?

In addition, the details needed to judge anything about this case in order to reach a reasonable decision were NOT included in the trial in a way in which the justice system laws and rules demand for a fair and equal trial and legal representation.

She has just as much right as anyone in this nation to demand her rights and equal protection for all be honored by the US justice system. Would you accept an unfair and unequal verdict, trial, and jury for yourself? If not, why do expect Ms. Mangum or anyone else to?; June 22, 2015 at 12:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny:

My ipad does not support flash. My office computer blocks the sharlogs. None of you, Sidney or Tin Foil has given me enough information to raise sufficient doubt to motivate me to go out of my way to find a computer on which I can open the sharlog.

Sidney has a transcript. Why doesn't he post it?; June 22, 2015 at 4:42 AM
Anonymous said...: My ipad does not support flash. My office computer blocks the sharlogs. None of you, Sidney or Tin Foil has given me enough information to raise sufficient doubt to motivate me to go out of my way to find a computer on which I can open the sharlog.

---- We don't give a sheat actually.

Sidney has a transcript. Why doesn't he post it?

---- He doesn't give a sheat either?; June 22, 2015 at 5:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

There is another current article that you will be interested in reading. I have quoted a few paragraphs below from that article:

@NCCapitol WRAL

Report: NC prosecutors sometimes push for death penalty in flimsy cases

"... "I think one of the points the report stresses is the leverage that comes with trying somebody and potentially pursuing the death penalty," Orr said. "It is sometimes the weakest cases, the ones where you don't have the strong evidence, that there seems to be an inclination to try to move forward with the death penalty."

The report doesn't suggest specific fixes to the issue. The center is one of a number of groups that has argued for the elimination of the death penalty altogether.

Orr said that, if the state is going to continue having capital punishment, it needs to do more to ensure a fair system. Both prosecutors and the defense attorneys for indigent defendants need better funding, he said, and he suggested the state ought to somehow centralize the decision on whether the death penalty is pursued, taking it out of the hands of prosecutors who might use the threat of capital punishment as tactical leverage.

"That would make for a fairer, more even-handed, dispassionate decision-making process," he said."; June 22, 2015 at 11:03 AM
Anonymous said...: "kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: 'Have you posted the links I asked you to provide? I did not see the'.................. No links are required. Just go to the head of this tread and click on the photo. That will take you to a chronicle of all documents relevant to this case. I do believe some bloggers were having a problem opening this on some types of devices. As far as the transcript goes even Anne Petersen had trouble getting it causing her to seek two extensions from the Court of Appeals."

Meaning kenny can provide links to nothing but sidney's garbage.; June 22, 2015 at 1:21 PM
Anonymous said...: " Kenny - you still aren't saying anything relevant on self-defense that wasn't done.

Crystal testified about the knife throwing and the martial arts. Ok - no one, not even Daye, disputes he went into a rage that day and kicked in the door and drug her out by her hair. The entire issue, as has been stated to you repeatedly but you refuse to acknowledge, is that Crystal said Daye was on top of her, which would have been self-defense - Daye said he let her go and she ran into another room to get a knife and came back.

How do the brass knuckles, and knife throwing (which he apparently wasn't very good at since he seemingly never hit her with one of the many knives he threw at her) change that?

Crystal had a history of doing what Daye said (that's why the Walker testimony was so damning), and the physical evidence/blood in the hall and lack of marks on Crystal - pointed more to his story than hers.

You and Sid keep obsessing on what happened at Duke - that is not how Crystal gets a Not Guilty. If she does get a new trial, you need to stop telling her to obsess over Duke, and start focusing on working with her attorneys on self-defense.

June 21, 2015 at 6:50 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

g... your posts as usual hold no meaning at all except that you are an evil duke troll from kc's blog.

Why don't ya'll (you especially) stop trolling Kenny and copying and pasting his or anyone else's past posts to start new trolls and arguments against your own trolled cut and paste posts, and then screaming quit whining or quit trolling when a reply is given in defense or asking you to stop or whatever? Seriously.

blah

Kenny, this is an open case - you do realize that right?

June 21, 2015 at 7:18 AM"

Boy ae you stressed.; June 22, 2015 at 1:23 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Meaning kenny can provide links to nothing but sidney's garbage".............. These are the "actual documents" that Dr.Harr has collected into a presentation.; June 22, 2015 at 2:09 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: Kenny - you still aren't saying anything relevant on self-defense that wasn't done"...... As I have stated, I am taking the caution of an Anonymous poster; "do your realize that this is an open case" to no longer get goaded into revealing what evidence of innocence might be presented, at a new trial, so that the prosecution would not be aware of it and make their attempts at refutation.; June 22, 2015 at 2:20 PM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Meaning kenny can provide links to nothing but sidney's garbage".............. These are the "actual documents" that Dr.Harr has collected into a presentation."

what sid collects is garbage.; June 22, 2015 at 3:26 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"As I have stated, I am taking the caution of an Anonymous poster; "do your realize that this is an open case" to no longer get goaded into revealing what evidence of innocence might be presented, at a new trial, so that the prosecution would not be aware of it and make their attempts at refutation."

Which is a dodge. You have no evidence.; June 22, 2015 at 3:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "what sid collects is garbage"...................................... Wake up. These are the original documents prepared by Durham Police, Duke Hospital, The ME 's report and Dr. Robert's review etc. I tend to agree with you, though, about Dr. Nicholls autopsy report.; June 22, 2015 at 4:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny 2:20:

I object to your characterization that I was "goading" you into revealing confidential evidence. I genuinely wished to discuss the evidence that relates to Mangum's self-defense claim. I found your high level narrative to be uncompelling and thought a debating specific statements and specific pieces of evidence would be productive.

Nevertheless, I respect your decision. I suggest that you refrain from discussing this subject altogether, lest you let slip critical information. Moreover, I encourage you to remind Sidney that this is an "open case" and his analysis of Kia Hanes' perjury may also provide ammunition to the prosecution if Mangum's appeal succeeds.

Given the high esteem in which Sidney holds you, I ask that you encourage Sidney to make the evidence available in a format other than flash.

Thanks.; June 22, 2015 at 5:00 PM
guiowen said...: Anon 5:00 p.m.,
Excellent idea. Suggest no more posts about this case by such as Kenn and Tinfoil (who have vital but secret information), as it is still open.; June 22, 2015 at 5:24 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny said:

"I am taking the caution of an Anonymous poster; "do your realize that this is an open case" to no longer get goaded into revealing what evidence of innocence might be presented . . ."

Thus far you and Sid have not revealed any evidence whatsoever of Mangum's innocence. Keep up the good work.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 22, 2015 at 6:10 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "Excellent idea. Suggest no more posts about this case by such as Kenn and Tinfoil (who have vital but secret information), as it is still open"......................... A sarcastic man is a wounded man.
Abe said: "Thus far you and Sid have not revealed any evidence whatsoever of Mangum's innocence. Keep up the good work".............................................. Ditto to Abe as well as Anonymous at 5:00 PM; June 22, 2015 at 9:17 PM
Anonymous said...: No, ya'lls hypocrisy in your national rants during the lacrosse case or support of it, compared to cheering on Duke killing a patient with malpractice and then covering up the fact with the explicit lies and assistance of the justice system ya'll denigrated so fiercely and publicly during the lacrosse case in order to further harm the victim in the lacrosse case again is beyond evil.

In addition, cyber-bullying and trolling and defaming the victim and those who are appalled by what they are seeing happening in these cases and do not support the corrupted system goes beyond acceptable to any.

The thing is, ya'll actually think you are in the right in supporting Duke and the justice system in harming others again, so then you attack the citizens of NC for the harm that you have done and supported Duke and the justice in doing when the corrupted Duke / Durham / NC injustice system does the same to you because you let them do it to others all along.

Do you understand? If you are going to support it, quit blaming others if you too get harmed by it. Do ya'll really think ya'll are so entitled that you can blame the citizens of NC for the problems that YOU caused and supported and contributed to by your support of the harm as long as it was only harming others?; June 22, 2015 at 10:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 10:16:

I remind you that the use of straw man arguments is an intellectually dishonest rhetorical device. No one on this board has ever "cheered on Duke killing a patient with malpractice."

I demand that you apologize for your despicable mischaracterization of other posters on this board.; June 23, 2015 at 3:36 AM
Anonymous said...: " Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, ya'lls hypocrisy in your national rants during the lacrosse case or support of it, compared to cheering on Duke killing a patient with malpractice and then covering up the fact with the explicit lies and assistance of the justice system ya'll denigrated so fiercely and publicly during the lacrosse case in order to further harm the victim in the lacrosse case again is beyond evil.

In addition, cyber-bullying and trolling and defaming the victim and those who are appalled by what they are seeing happening in these cases and do not support the corrupted system goes beyond acceptable to any.

The thing is, ya'll actually think you are in the right in supporting Duke and the justice system in harming others again, so then you attack the citizens of NC for the harm that you have done and supported Duke and the justice in doing when the corrupted Duke / Durham / NC injustice system does the same to you because you let them do it to others all along.

Do you understand? If you are going to support it, quit blaming others if you too get harmed by it. Do ya'll really think ya'll are so entitled that you can blame the citizens of NC for the problems that YOU caused and supported and contributed to by your support of the harm as long as it was only harming others?

June 22, 2015 at 10:16 PM"

Boy are you stressed.; June 23, 2015 at 3:51 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: "Excellent idea. Suggest no more posts about this case by such as Kenn and Tinfoil (who have vital but secret information), as it is still open"......................... A sarcastic man is a wounded man.
Abe said: "Thus far you and Sid have not revealed any evidence whatsoever of Mangum's innocence. Keep up the good work".............................................. Ditto to Abe as well as Anonymous at 5:00 PM

June 22, 2015 at 9:17 PM"

kenny is incredibly stupid.; June 23, 2015 at 3:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Funny that when asked to provide proof to back his claims, Kenny is now hiding behing the "this is an open case" argument - yet he has yet to condemn Sid for laying absolutely every one of his theories out there. If giving information to the other side hurts Crystal, where is the condemnation of Sid?; June 23, 2015 at 5:19 AM
Anonymous said...: yeah it would be fracking funny if Duke wasn't killing patients now in its mad quest to be 'the best'

stupid f*ing funny; June 23, 2015 at 5:26 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 5:26:

Please stop acting like a fracking a-hole.; June 23, 2015 at 6:36 AM
Anonymous said...: yeah because your trolling cyberbullying bs 'fun' is oh so more important and relevant than concern about patients getting killed at Duke to frame another for murder - go you; June 23, 2015 at 6:42 AM
Anonymous said...: What the frack is going on with all this fracking going on?; June 23, 2015 at 6:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 6:42:

Please stop asking like a fracking a-hole.; June 23, 2015 at 6:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 10:16:

Where is your apology?; June 23, 2015 at 6:47 AM
Anonymous said...: No, ya'lls hypocrisy in your national rants during the lacrosse case or support of it, compared to cheering on Duke killing a patient with malpractice and then covering up the fact with the explicit lies and assistance of the justice system ya'll denigrated so fiercely and publicly during the lacrosse case in order to further harm the victim in the lacrosse case again is beyond evil.

In addition, cyber-bullying and trolling and defaming the victim and those who are appalled by what they are seeing happening in these cases and do not support the corrupted system goes beyond acceptable to any.

The thing is, ya'll actually think you are in the right in supporting Duke and the justice system in harming others again, so then you attack the citizens of NC for the harm that you have done and supported Duke and the justice in doing when the corrupted Duke / Durham / NC injustice system does the same to you because you let them do it to others all along.

Do you understand? If you are going to support it, quit blaming others if you too get harmed by it. Do ya'll really think ya'll are so entitled that you can blame the citizens of NC for the problems that YOU caused and supported and contributed to by your support of the harm as long as it was only harming others?; June 23, 2015 at 6:59 AM
Walt said...: Abe wrote: "Thus far you and Sid have not revealed any evidence whatsoever of Mangum's innocence. Keep up the good work."

Let us not forget, Abe, that Sid did breach Crystal's confidence in him and reveal evidence of her guilt. Since then, most of his contributions to this blog have been aimed at covering up that unfortunate act of treachery.

Walt-in-Durham; June 23, 2015 at 7:00 AM
Anonymous said...: All of your contributions Walt have been aimed at covering up Duke killing a patient with malpractice and then covering up the fact with the explicit lies and assistance of the justice system.; June 23, 2015 at 7:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 7:04:

Walt's contributions have not been aimed at covering up Duke's malpractice. You clearly are mistaken. I demand that you apologize.; June 23, 2015 at 7:07 AM
Anonymous said...: you demand? egad; June 23, 2015 at 7:11 AM
Anonymous said...: 10:16 and 7:04 owe apologizes for falsely accusing other posters.; June 23, 2015 at 7:13 AM
Anonymous said...: No, ya'lls hypocrisy in your national rants during the lacrosse case or support of it, compared to cheering on Duke killing a patient with malpractice and then covering up the fact with the explicit lies and assistance of the justice system ya'll denigrated so fiercely and publicly during the lacrosse case in order to further harm the victim in the lacrosse case again is beyond evil.

In addition, cyber-bullying and trolling and defaming the victim and those who are appalled by what they are seeing happening in these cases and do not support the corrupted system goes beyond acceptable to any.

The thing is, ya'll actually think you are in the right in supporting Duke and the justice system in harming others again, so then you attack the citizens of NC for the harm that you have done and supported Duke and the justice in doing when the corrupted Duke / Durham / NC injustice system does the same to you because you let them do it to others all along.

Do you understand? If you are going to support it, quit blaming others if you too get harmed by it. Do ya'll really think ya'll are so entitled that you can blame the citizens of NC for the problems that YOU caused and supported and contributed to by your support of the harm as long as it was only harming others?; June 23, 2015 at 7:15 AM
Anonymous said...: 10:16, 6:59, 7:04 and 7:15 owe apologies.; June 23, 2015 at 7:18 AM
Anonymous said...: No, ya'lls hypocrisy in your national rants during the lacrosse case or support of it, compared to cheering on Duke killing a patient with malpractice and then covering up the fact with the explicit lies and assistance of the justice system ya'll denigrated so fiercely and publicly during the lacrosse case in order to further harm the victim in the lacrosse case again is beyond evil.

In addition, cyber-bullying and trolling and defaming the victim and those who are appalled by what they are seeing happening in these cases and do not support the corrupted system goes beyond acceptable to any.

The thing is, ya'll actually think you are in the right in supporting Duke and the justice system in harming others again, so then you attack the citizens of NC for the harm that you have done and supported Duke and the justice in doing when the corrupted Duke / Durham / NC injustice system does the same to you because you let them do it to others all along.

Do you understand? If you are going to support it, quit blaming others if you too get harmed by it. Do ya'll really think ya'll are so entitled that you can blame the citizens of NC for the problems that YOU caused and supported and contributed to by your support of the harm as long as it was only harming others?; June 23, 2015 at 7:21 AM
Anonymous said...: No, ya'lls hypocrisy in your national rants during the lacrosse case or support of it, compared to cheering on Duke killing a patient with malpractice and then covering up the fact with the explicit lies and assistance of the justice system ya'll denigrated so fiercely and publicly during the lacrosse case in order to further harm the victim in the lacrosse case again is beyond evil.

In addition, cyber-bullying and trolling and defaming the victim and those who are appalled by what they are seeing happening in these cases and do not support the corrupted system goes beyond acceptable to any.

The thing is, ya'll actually think you are in the right in supporting Duke and the justice system in harming others again, so then you attack the citizens of NC for the harm that you have done and supported Duke and the justice in doing when the corrupted Duke / Durham / NC injustice system does the same to you because you let them do it to others all along.

Do you understand? If you are going to support it, quit blaming others if you too get harmed by it. Do ya'll really think ya'll are so entitled that you can blame the citizens of NC for the problems that YOU caused and supported and contributed to by your support of the harm as long as it was only harming others?; June 23, 2015 at 7:22 AM
Anonymous said...: 10:16, 6:59, 7:04, 7:15and 7:21 owe apologies.; June 23, 2015 at 7:23 AM
Anonymous said...: No, ya'lls hypocrisy in your national rants during the lacrosse case or support of it, compared to cheering on Duke killing a patient with malpractice and then covering up the fact with the explicit lies and assistance of the justice system ya'll denigrated so fiercely and publicly during the lacrosse case in order to further harm the victim in the lacrosse case again is beyond evil.

In addition, cyber-bullying and trolling and defaming the victim and those who are appalled by what they are seeing happening in these cases and do not support the corrupted system goes beyond acceptable to any.

The thing is, ya'll actually think you are in the right in supporting Duke and the justice system in harming others again, so then you attack the citizens of NC for the harm that you have done and supported Duke and the justice in doing when the corrupted Duke / Durham / NC injustice system does the same to you because you let them do it to others all along.

Do you understand? If you are going to support it, quit blaming others if you too get harmed by it. Do ya'll really think ya'll are so entitled that you can blame the citizens of NC for the problems that YOU caused and supported and contributed to by your support of the harm as long as it was only harming others?; June 23, 2015 at 7:24 AM
Anonymous said...: 10:16, 6:59, 7:04, 7:15, 7:21, 7:22 and 7:24 owe apologies.; June 23, 2015 at 7:26 AM
Anonymous said...: "Anonymous said...

10:16, 6:59, 7:04, 7:15, 7:21, 7:22 and 7:24 owe apologies.

June 23, 2015 at 7:26 AM"

We are owed apologies, from those who support the incredibly stupid twins, kenny and sidney, and their campaign to get their favorite murderess a pass for her crime.; June 23, 2015 at 9:43 AM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; July 11, 2015 at 4:12 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 594 of 594 Newer› Newest»

Saturday, June 6, 2015

Official J4N Investigation into Reginald Daye's autopsy report and death

594 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me